this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
218 points (91.3% liked)
Black People Twitter
775 readers
1 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I never thought I'd say this, but I'm with Ben on this one. That was an artwork painted long before any living person was born, and should be still around long after any of us die.
Destroying history in the name of a cause should never be acceptable.
...Arthur Balfour died in 1930 and was painted in 1914 (7 years after the oldest living person was born). It's hanging in Trinity College, not the National Gallery. It's really not a culturally significant piece of art.
The painting is actually more recent than I thought, but destroying it is still scummy.
The house I just bought has pipes almost as old, and just as artistically significant as this random nonsense. I'm still going to replace them
Ok let's extend your logic to its maxima - so what you're saying is that if you had to choose between destroying all paintings in the world or everyone dying - you'd choose everyone to die and save the paintings?
Most sane centrist ever...
Your heart is in the right place, but this is a strawman argument.
People do die for culture, choose to die to protect their heritage. I'm sure there's several philosophy PhDs worth of conversation to be had about that.
In this case: no history has been lost, no culture destroyed, and nothing of value lost. I suggest avoiding getting lost in hypotheticals because the actual case is a lot more clear cut. No one should lose their lives (inc the damage of a lengthy prison sentence) for this instance.
I'd reserve that for those who live in maximal terms. They're worth less than the paintings 😘